Oakwatch: The Oakland Code Enforcement Project Meeting Minutes May 16th, 2012
Mission: Oakwatch: The Oakland Code Enforcement Project seeks to improve the quality of life for residents, employees and visitors by enforcing codes on negligent property owners, housing violations, parking violations, disruptive behavior, excessive noise and underage drinking in the Oakland neighborhood. I.
In attendance: Carol Mitchell, Rick Reilly, Kevin Stiles, Ronald Jardini, Immacolata Raffaele, Mark Oleniacz, Nicholas Solic, Lizabeth Gray, Peg Sedlack, Kathy Boykowycz, Ethel DiIuliis, Kristin Kovacik, Kalliope Lardas, Mary Ballerini, Janice Lorenz, Danielle Atkins, Ian Everhart, Lawrence Robinson, John Wilds, Liz Style, Brian Hill, Hanson Kappelman, Adam Butkus, Blair Kossis, Rebekkah Ranallo, Nathan Hart Hanson Kappelman reviewed why we changed our name out of respect for the long-standing Oakland Task Force.
II.
Summarize Pitt’s Student Government Board Good Neighbor Luncheon roundtable and follow up action items/ brainstorming session of new ideas of way to change student behavior patterns in the neighborhood(Nathan Hart & Blair Kossis) a) Nathan Hart summarized the many ideas discussed at the Good Neighbor Luncheon. They noted that it is important to catch students as freshmen, to get them accustomed to good practices early on, so they do not get into bad habits. Mary Mallampalli of SGB Community Outreach committee is working to get a new training program for RA’s. Pitt has a session for students moving off-campus, giving information on tenants’ rights and responsibilities, and this might be a good venue to teach about landlord issues, responsible partying, and about being a part of a community. Bottom line: it would be valuable to have a session to educate students before they move off-campus. One big problem is that the current session is not mandatory. Pitt is currently brainstorming how to combat that challenge. b) Cool idea: awareness campaign for being a good neighbor via methods like the JumboTron at sporting events, the Pitt News or a banner ad on the Pitt homepage that students see every day when they log into their email. c) One resident said we should target landlords as our top priority instead of students. Her philosophy is students don’t try to keep a property in good condition if it is not well-maintained to begin with. We just need to figure out the right time to do this. Is it a good idea to encourage student renters to report bad landlords at the end of the year? On the one hand, they have nothing to lose as far as fearing landlord repercussion, but on the other hand, once they move there is no contact person to check in again with. Larry from Allegheny County Health Department said in his experience, it’s best to do this at the beginning of the year because student contact info is your starting point for this process. Move-in, when parents are present, might be the best time to do outreach. d) Kitchen magnets could be made with phone numbers for inspectors and other important information. OPDC is spearheading this effort already and will keep group posted. Trash day
e)
f) g)
h)
i) j) k) l) m)
n)
o)
p) q)
schedules could also distributed as part of the Arrival Survival program, as well as information on 311, 911, parking regulations, and noise regulations. Residents could distribute information that includes some rules and common-sense practices for having parties and trash policies. A single-sheet paper for hosts would be useful, possibly titled “So you want to have a party…” Parties tend to begin the week after Labor Day, so materials should be ready by then. Should include information about trash rules (increased trash problems are always big during student move-in), including that recycling is mandatory and biweekly, including the schedule for it; that trash cans must have lids. Some of this will be incorporated into the magnet OPDC is working to produce. It could be modeled on the information Penn State distributes (Liz Gray and OPDC have example), in a magnet form, to be posted on a refrigerator. During the first week of move-in, there should be a block watch meeting. OPDC has hired a Student-Resident Liaison specifically to foster mutually beneficial relationships between longterm residents and students. One possibility for block watch would be for a long-term resident to adopt a block and serve as a contact person for students on the block, too. There is a housing recommendation website sponsored by Pitt’s Student Government Board, as well as other landlord sites like landorslum.com. The Pitt site might be preferable since it’s student-driven, and not open to just anyone who might want to submit it—including landlords reviewing themselves. Some students don’t want to report in on their landlords until there is a problem. Contacting fraternities’ risk-management chairs might be a good way to get information out, since they are trying to keep risks low, as well. Some advertising could go in bars, on the back of bathroom doors, on buses and shuttles. For many people, it has been more fruitful to have friendly, face-to-face conversations with student residents, with a non-confrontational tone. Though eventually some bad behaviors may return, it’s proven to work in some residents’ experience. Landlords have responsibilities to inform tenants about the rules. There is a high variance in quality between both landlords and tenants, and there should be also some responsibility placed on the landlord when tenants misbehave. Sending landlords certified letters, copying city officials, has been an effective way to voice your complaints and see results, in some residents’ experience. Where sale of alcohol is a factor, the city nuisance bar task force or state liquor control board might be good agencies to write to, with copies to the landlords and/or tenants. John Wilds confirmed that Pitt Police is already planning to have an increased presence of police offers during weekends known to be most problematic. Oakwatch and OPDC will work with them on this effort. There is a lack of manpower to issue citations to every person at a party, but on occasion perhaps police should “make an example” of some party attendees and issue them all citations. There tends to be a correlation between raucous parties and other violation, so it would be a good use of officers’ time. We need to emphasize this when getting commitment from police. Hosts of parties, not just attendees, should be targeted. Block captains could drop by houses on the afternoon before parties start, or right when they start, and ask people to be responsible. They could pass out information to the hosts and attendees if there is printed material available. Early intervention will have a good affect compared to trying to scale back a party that has already gotten out of hand. It is more effective to get them to move inside or scale back when done early. Christmas lights outside a house often signals the presence of a party. These could be houses to target when the lights go on. Could we form a relationship with local beer distributors and have them pass out some “responsible host” materials when someone buys a keg?
r) Residents could ask the liquor control board to do a special patrol during the first weekend of classes, when there will be many parties. Having those citations will have some effect—word will get around to other students about increased enforcement. s) Noise violations are inconsistently enforced. Nobody seems to know what the rules are, and the police do not have any decibel meters. The laws seem to be unenforceable as written. OPDC will look into this with City Council. t) In addition to student parties, there are sometimes events at Phipps Conservatory and in Schenley Park that run late and are problematic. OPDC will look into this. u) Linking with fraternities and sororities to spread the message might be useful—get a peer-topeer communication, rather than top-down communication coming from “adults” telling students what to do. v) We should use existing programs to develop more engagement between long-term residents and students. III.
Track, Add, Reposition, and Remove Oakland’s 10 Most Wanted properties a. 3738 Dawson: No update, awaiting ZBA decision on parking issue, awaiting next hearing on hillside stabilization issue. b. 53 Lawn Street: BBI corrected info in files and sent notice to owners. c. 3109 Forbes Ave: Owners submitted new site plan to zoning, includes greenery, but Brian is not convinced it’s correct yet. Public can weigh in once it goes before the Planning Commission. d. 3101 Niagara: No update, still awaiting continuance to be scheduled. e. 3203 Joe Hammer Square: 311 reported to BBI that this is not in system. OPDC has emails from 311 showing that it is. Brian, OPDC, and Liz Style will work together to see where the mistake happened and get in back on 311’s radar. f. West Oakland/VA Hospital construction route: We need to pursue this with City Traffic Engineer/DPW further to check on progress. g. 20 Mackey Street: BBI will look into citing for overgrowth. ACHD has sent a notice to the Sherriff’s office. h. 100 Block Oakland Avenue: ACHD is sending a food inspector, but it will be at least a month before they get there due to a backlog. i. 3717 Parkview Ave: Should appear in court dockets soon. Owner, Michael Bupp, is well known as a slumlord. j. New problem properties noted by members present: 3421 Bates, 3409 Bates, 3415 Bates, 3202 Kennett. Housing Court schedule (Rebekkah Ranallo, 5 minutes)
IV.
331 McKee Place, 2122 5th Avenue, & 376 Meyran Avenue, May 24th, 10am, Judge Ricciardi : 1700 East Carson Street, 3rd Floor V.
•
Announcements, (Rebekkah Ranallo, 5 minutes) Oakland 2025 draft recommendations are available at www.opdc.org
VI.
Next meeting- June 20, 12:00 pm, Forbes Tower, 11th Floor. Lunch provided.
VII.
Meeting Adjournment
Remember to keep flooding 311 with calls about the nuisance properties in your neighborhood, and let Oakwatch know when you do! You can submit reports to our email account at oakwatch@opdc.org or call us at 412.621.7863 ext. 27. Thanks for keeping us in the loop!